Why Do Governments Find It So Hard To Control Public Expenditure?
Since the 1970's rising public expenditure has become a politically salient issue, with the focus being on the difficulties experienced in trying to control it. In order to answer a question concerning why governments find it hard to control public expenditure it is first necessary to look at the reasons for the growth in public spending. There are three approaches which attempt to give reasons for growing public expenditure which I intend to scrutinise, these are, the societal system approach, the political system approach and the governmental system approach. An evaluation of these approaches should in turn shed light as to why governments find rising public expenditure hard to control.
Following this approach which gives a wide outlook on the problems facing governments in controlling public expenditure, I will look at the post 1979 conservative government as it in particular targeted controlling expenditure upon taking office.
Under the societal system approach one reason why a growth in public spending can be seen to have occurred is due to Wagner's ‘law of increasing state activity.' Wagner's claim is that as per capita real income increases in particular nations, they will spend a higher proportion of national product through government. As Wagner's reasons for increased public expenditure tend to be centralised around industrialisation and its associated effects it is not surprising to find that he thought the density of urban living would increase social frictions to such an extent that the government would be called in to handle it. That is to say, urban living would result in the need for enhanced police protection and other forms of government regulation. Wagner also believed that with growing industry certain investments would require so much capital that the state would have to provide it. He thought there would also be public goods that may not be in the interests of an entrepreneur to provide.
There are counter arguments to Wagner's suggestions, the first of these is that it could be argued that increased density would provide opportunities for economies of scale. Thus, the proximity of people to one another could result in networks of personal support, lessening the need for public services.
Secondly, contrary to Wagner's arguments for public good provision by the state, it is possible to show other countries that either do without it, or provide for user charges. This shifts the burden from general revenues to those who benefit most directly.
Another reason for rising government expenditure under the societal system approach is expressed via Tarschy's ‘demonstration effect.' He suggests that the coming of television "has led to increased awareness of the standard of
During the American Revolutionary War, all of the states had incurred a lot of debt from other foreign nations. So Hamilton decided that America must pay back this debt so that they could maintain peace and regulate commerce with European countries. The southern states had paid off their debt but the northern states were still in debt. So he composed a compromise - The south would not protest the Federal government paying off any northern states that still had debt, in the condition that the south chose where the national capital would be built. This compromise worked as the entire United States debt was paid off and the capital was constructed in the District of Columbia (DC) within a few years. In the construction of the capital, Maryland and Virginia donated land for the capital. The importance of this plan was that they had no debt, so this would bring power and respect to the United States from the European countries by keeping peace with everybody and allowing for continued trade. Because who would trade with a country that has debt with
... them enough to care how they live. Once that was done you could take the care they discovered for those people and use it to better their homes. And the city would well be on it’s way to improvement.
complain. In conclusion, it seems to be that one of the most populated cities in America is
...tes would never be seen as a stable and reliable nation. To pay off the debts Hamilton designed to raise taxes throughout the country. And when the capital moved from Philadelphia to New York City, Hamilton offered to convince Congress and the President to move the capitol south to an appointed area near Virginia now known as District of Columbia.
People will be more willing and capable of living in denser, more efficient environments only when the underlying culture that sustains sprawl is altered. The sense of the American community needs to be re-established if there is to be any real progress in the battle against sprawl. The REAL problem here then, is that changing the culture of a state, of a nation, is a very long and difficult undertaking…
Before our nation’s capital rested as Washington D.C it was located in New York City temporarily. A year later it was moved to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. A fierce rivalry developed between the northern and southern states over the location; their economic interests were completely different. The states believed that the newly appointed city to be the nations capital would have more power over the remaining states, even congressmen were aware that the area receiving the capital would gain wealth and political influence. Some of the competing cities offered land and money as incentives.
However, there is usually not enough land or housing for the city's growing population. There is also not enough jobs in the city to keep everyone employed. Poverty increases and jobs give lower and lower pay. The poor live in slums
An aging population, a younger generation who prefer walkable places, economic shifts, and the environmental impacts of suburban development are all contributing factors” (Beatz 141). Reshaping Metropolitan America gives an argument, as well as a blueprint, on how we can transform our infrastructure and housing demands by 2030.
He thought that the National Legislature should be represented with one representative per state because he thought that if the representatives were chosen proportionally, the smaller states would not be represented enough.
"Where to put a nation's capitol?" was the exact question that irritated George Washington and a man by the name of Pierre L'Enfant, city planner and engineer. "The District of Columbia is a perfect site; its in the middle of the 14 states, halfway between Massachusetts and Georgia," exclaimed Washington. Being near to the ocean so that many people can get to it easily. In 1790, Congress passed the "Residence Act," which provides that the federal government will be located in a permanent site on the Potomac River by 1800. Pierre Charles L'Enfant develops plan for capital city; he and President Washington select site for "Congress House" on Jenkins Heights. With a location chosen the only task now is to design the capitol building. (Prolman, 5)
The government is gaining too much power. The three reasons are because of George Bush’s police action, how they can control our individualized lives, and how the government can overwrite an amendment to the constitution in the bill of rights.
Finally, the municipal government relies on development costs to generate revenue. The basis for assessing development costs is driving the low density and it plays role in car-centered development. However, this requires investment and more expensive municipal infrastructure. Development costs are an important cost that can affect development locations, time schedules, and other decisions. Development costs may affect land resource consumption and community design, and are increasingly being used as revenue sources and growth management tools. Therefore, more municipalities should consider better adjustment of their development cost design and growth management policies. Developers pay development fees to the government for the infrastructure
Welcome to our city YRN. We have 600,000 residents in our city. Our city is cold during the winter and hot during the summer. We love the cold weather because it helps get rid of fungus on plants and crops. We love the hot weather because the sun helps our crops with photosynthesis. Our city consist of many mountains, oceans, and plains. We get our water from snow, rain, hail, rivers, oceans and lakes. 25 percent of our city is crops, 25 percent of our city is forests, and 50 percent of our city consists of industries. We need forests because we not want our city to trap heat.
Living in the City vs. Living in the Country The age-old question has plagued many, “Should I live in a city or should I live in the country?”. There are many advantages and disadvantages to choosing a lifestyle in either setting, and careful examination of all aspects is needed to make the perfect decision for you. One major issue affecting many people trying to make the decision on where to live is their quality of life in either extreme. Health, education, and transportation are three major concerns that many consider.
Free education allows everyone to study but with low intensity or levels of education. For example, governments with low incomes would not have enough money to employ professional teachers or provide students with all the technological equipment necessary in their studies; it is too expensive. In addition, with free education, the number of students will be impressive. It is important to emphasize that education is not the only responsibility that governments have. They also economically support other public institutions. According to OECD (2008), the major challenge for countries is to secure sufficient funding levels to enable tertiary education institutions to meet the growing expectations of society and respond to the growing demand by students. However, education without cost allows people the same rights and opportunities necessary to the development of an educated society with moral and ethical